Combinations of polyvinyl chloride and chlorinated polyethylene are established in the art, for example, flexible wire and cable cladding. Blends of PVC and chlorinated polyethylene are recognized as contributing both impact modifying characteristics as well as ease of melt processing. Chlorinated polyethylene is not particularly efficient when utilized as the sole impact modifier with PVC, hence an amount needed to boost notched Izod Impact strength to at least about 10 lb.-ft./inch notch will lead to appreciable loss in rigidity, measured as tensile of flexural modulus.
There have been suggested graft copolymers of chlorinated polyethylene and PVC. Ludwig Beer, in 1962 suggested in U.S. Pat. No. 3,268,623 that improvements in properties could be obtained by dissolving CPE in vinyl chloride monomer and suspension polymerizing to yield an improved combination compared to mechanical blending of the two resins.
In U.S. Pat. No. 4,481,333 Fleisher et al. disclosed the combination of PVC, CPE, and fluoropolymer. There it was taught that if prior to combining with PVC, fluoropolymer and CPE are first combined, a 10-fold lesser quantity of fluoropolymer (PTFE) provided the same magnitude of reduction in extruder torque compared to a ternary mixture.
Hankey disclosed in Canadian Patent No. 636,534 that on the addition of 19 weight parts of CPE "per 100 weight parts of PVC" (phr), room temperature notched Izod impact strength improved to 24 ft.-lb./inch notch. Hankey showed that at this level of CPE, the flexural modulus of PVC was lowered from 400,000 psi to 270,000 psi, while in a combination 5 parts of CPE, 5 parts of a rubbery diene type polymeric impact modifier and 90 parts of PVC, room temperature notched Izod impact was comparable but rigidity was not sacrificed to the same degree. The samples demonstrated were milled and compression molded, with no teaching to extrusion characteristics.
Frey and Klug disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,940,456 that extruded PVC blends with chlorinated high pressure polyethylene may, in certain instances, exhibit coarseness, i.e., rough extrusion characteristics. They proposed to solve this problem by employing a CPE which had been chlorinated in the presence of a finely-divided silicic acid and siloxane oil. The CPE described was of high molecular weight characterized by a specific viscosity and methylcyclohexane swell. The swell number indicated the "through" chlorination, i.e., the degree to which all chains were chlorinated.
Klug and Frey disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,280,940 the combination of PVC and two CPE's to provide improved transparency for weatherable blends. They noted that the incorporation of CPE with methylcyclohexane (MCH) swell of more than 10% lead to reduced transparency. Klug and Frey also noted that the combination of CPE and PVC with K value 70 is difficult and can lead to rough extrudate. They proposed a combination of PVC (K=55-65) and two CPE's, one having a low MCH swell, and both containing 37-42% chlorine.
With respect to CPVC/CPE blends, Jennings and Kliner of the B.F.Goodrich Co. disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,299,182 the combination of impact improvement and processing enhancement of CPVC with small amounts of homogeneously chlorinated low pressure, high density polyethylene at usage levels of from 2 to 10 phr. Processing aids, plasticizers and impact modifiers were preferably avoided. The examples illustrated a variety of chlorinated polyethylene base polymers combined at 5 parts per 100 parts CPVC (phr), the CPVC having a density of 1.57 g/cc, corresponding to a chlorine content of about 66%. CPE and CPVC were precipitated from cements, dried, milled and pressed for determination of heat distortion temperature (HDT) and IZOD impact strength. The CPE chlorine content from 30-40% was preferred and impact strength was maximized using most types of base polyethylene having about 35% chlorine content. Exceptions to this trend occurred with a copolymer of ethylene and butene having a relatively high melt index. The preferred Zeigler type polyethylenes chlorinated to about 30-32% always gave higher impact strength than those with higher chlorine content. It was noted that extrusion speed and appearance of the extrudate was best at 7 phr CPE, while at 10 phr and higher, chemical resistance and HDT were detrimentally altered.
Dreyfuss and Tucker also of The BFGoodrich Company disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,453,347 that enhanced melt flow rate and processing stability of CPVC/CPE blends can be obtained by the addition of 0.25 to 2.5 phr of rubbery amorphous polyalkylene mono-epoxide. One aspect of the '347 patent was to obtain a combination of HDT and impact resistance with from 5 to 10 phr CPE. A small effective amount, on the order of 1 to 2 phr of the amorphous rubbery epoxide imparted higher melt flow rates. The working examples were prepared by milling and compression molding, while melt flow rate was measured by a small extrusion rheometer. The best melt flow rate/HDT/impact strength balance was observed at CPE use levels of 7.75 phr.
Buning, et al have taught in U.S. Pat. No. 3,459,692 that due to the higher crystallinity of stereo-regular CPVC and the tendency of a cooling melt to re-crystallize, molded articles from a blend of CPE and stereo-regular CPVC are more brittle than blends with atactic CPVC. They found that milled, pressed sheets of a blend of CPE and CPVC, where the CPVC was derived from 55 to 85% syndiotactic PVC were shown to exhibit toughness, no re-crystallization tendency and had higher corresponding Vicar softening temperatures than with the atactic CPVC blend.
More recently, G. Wear in U.S. Pat. No. 4,213,891 disclosed the use of a combination of high and low molecular weight chlorinated polyethylene with CPVC for calendared sheets having improved thermoforming characteristics. Another object of Wear was the use of PVC/acrylate based impact modifier for compounds with reduced smoke emission. CPVC having 66% chlorine was combined with 15 phr CPE (36% Cl and Mw greater than 1,000,000) and 7.5 phr CPE (22% Cl and Mw less than 100,000). The blend was fluxed on a Banbury/mill then fed into a calendar stack to produce a uniform 0.010-0.017 inch sheet.
There have been found no detailed published reports systematically studying the extrusion characteristics of CPVC/CPE blends in which CPE is present above 10 phr. Blends of PVC and CPE exhibit more consistent melt characteristics than blends of post-chlorinated PVC and CPE. Although at low levels of 1 to 5 phr, CPE imparts improved impact strength and processibility under low shear extrusion, the behavior of extrudates containing more than 10 phr CPE under higher shear conditions is different. The differences with PVC can not be extrapolated to CPVC blends. Good processibility suggests lower viscosity, torque and work input, hence processing stability, however this does take account of the variations in extrusion quality observed over varied conditions, varying chlorination level or molecular weight of CPE and CPVC.
Compared to PVC, chlorinated PVC exhibits higher density, higher Tg, improved resistance to solvent and chemical attack, requires higher extrusion temperature with greater susceptibility to degradation, higher melt viscosity and brittleness, these properties vary with different chlorine content of CPVC. The heat distortion temperature for homo-PVC is about 75.degree. C. whereas it is 80.degree. C. to 130.degree. C. for chlorinated PVC, and is proportionate with chlorine content. Likewise, Vicat softening point for PVC is at least about 30.degree. C. lower for chlorinated PVC. As the temperature of processing increases with CPVC chlorine content, blend morphology with CPE varies.
As illustrated below relatively 63-65% chlorine content CPVC is observed to behave differently with CPE than CPVC with relatively high chlorine content due in part to changing morphology with temperature. Whereas homo-PVC has a characteristic viscosity range for given molecular weight, its structure is uniform, made up of repeating units having the following structure: ##STR1## whereas chlorinated PVC is a combination of three structures, one of which corresponds to the repeating unit of PVC (I), and two other repeating unit types: ##STR2## The proportion of structures I, II and III for CPVC varies with chlorine content, the higher the chlorine content the higher proportion of structures II and III and the lesser proportion of structure I. Correlation between chlorine content and proportion of structures I, II and III in non post-chlorinated and chlorinated PVC is set forth in Table A below:
TABLE A ______________________________________ % Chlorine Structure Content (I) (II) (III) ______________________________________ PVC 56.6 100 0 0 CPVC 57.5 97.2 2.8 0 CPVC 61.2 81.1 17.5 1.4 CPVC 63.2 71.1 26.8 2.1 CPVC 69.5 31.1 49.9 19.0 CPVC 72.6 5.5 60.5 34.0 ______________________________________
On the basis of Table A, chlorinated PVC with a chlorine content of about 61% contains about 80% of structure I that corresponds to non post-chlorinated PVC, about 17% of structure II, and about 1% of structure III whereas at 72% chlorine content, chlorinated PVC contains about 5% of structure I, more than 60% of structure II, and more than 35% of structure III. Thus, there is no simple extrapolation of properties obtained in blends of PVC and CPE to blends of CPVC and CPE.